Leaderboard

I'm a straight man. I have been married to my beloved wife for almost 30 years, and have never had any sexual experience with anyone else in the world, ever. I don't seek to stand up and defend gay people because I am gay, openly or secretly. I stand up and defend gay people from bullying and abuse because they are people. They are people God created and Jesus died for, and they deserve better from those who claim to follow Jesus. In all the debates and discussions, we need to be aware of how they impact on people. These are real sons and daughters, uncles and aunts, members of families, people with jobs and hobbies and lives and interests. It's important to know the truth and to speak the truth, but if we don't have love we don't have anything. I take the point that love does not mean 'anything goes', and that if we love someone and are fully convinced that they are on a dangerous path and we are in a close relationship with them it may be appropriate to privately tell them so. I'm not so sure it's ever appropriate to publicly shame and attack someone. What was Jesus approach to those who accused the woman caught in adultery, and to the woman herself? I hope we'll continue to delve into what the Bible says and means, but I did want to make it clear why I think it's important. It's not because I'm against the Bible: if I was, life would be much simpler, I could just rely on my own opinion to say that I believe homosexual people are people like everyone else with all the same rights and freedoms. I'm seeking to determine what the Bible actually says and means, and trying to do so as carefully as I can.

I have peaches, nectarines, plums, apricots, & pears in bloom now.

See it happening on a live cam: http://dceaglecam.eagles.org/ Watch Mr. President caring for it.

So let me ask the question that seems to be ignored!! Can 2 men or 2 women pro-create?? Did not God give us an example at creation of marriage????? And than what did he ask them to do??? Just because heterosexuals have problems with there marriages has nothing to do with what God instituted at creation!! We as humans messed that up!!

That's been my whole point. And who does the convicting? It's not me nor anybody else...it's the work of the Holy Spirit. I really don't understand why so many feel they need to do His work.

I stumbled upon CA and then didn't come back for a long time... i have no idea why at the time. I finally stepped in venturing to experience community... i found incredible diversity which i am very at home with... I have been enjoying participating in and reading if not posting. It really has helped my communication of my faith everywhere i go. God is wherever you find Him.

@Kevin(wrx) I was, I believe in China when this was posted and only had an iPhone to use, am only now responding as I dwell in my Canadian Abode. Trust me here, if all the posters had to agree with me, there would be only 1-2 other posters, I found the whole homosexual event repugnant, including gay marriage. Therefor I will never be involved in that act, nor would I ever marry a male. When I get myself 100% pure then I will begin working on others. I know this, we all have struggles, I wouldn't trade mine for that of a gay person. I believe in christian fellowship, as well as a powerful God who can convict and transform by his mighty power. I do not believe that I am to replace the Holy Spirit, and God has not asked me to so far, and I do not see a change in the immediate future. I do believe we need to open our circle of friends, and support and pray for one another. Bringing up the gay issue to me, is just as annoying as "that" person bringing up the fact that I am over weight, and he has had totally victory over that. It is very ok to differ, it is not very ok to condemn or slam people, over victories we have had and they have not. Just my opinion, others will differ, and I am ok with that,

I'm just curious but didn't want to disturb any of the active topics going on right now, but why is it that it is primarily men who are debating the issue of homosexuality here?

What about Land Lord? Those who own Land are called Lords. Mayors are "His Worship" Judges are also Lords. "If it please thee My Lord" I provide this..... whatever. We call people Brother and Sister to sounds religious, and he that does the will of our father is our brother, BUT no where in the Bible does it say "Give greetings to Brother Paul or Peter" etc

the titles for religious officials don't particularly bother me... they're just titles of respect. George Bush used "his holiness" to address Pope John Paul because that was the correct way to address him. What was he supposed to say — "Hey, Dude"? what irritates me more are the familiarity words bandied about by Christians: "Brother so and so", "Sister so and so", the "saints" in the church, "mothers of Israel", "prophet" — those words (and others) are sometimes used with such indiscretion that they have been cheapened and the usages are basically nullified (in my mind).

No, it is not. The dilemma is real. The point is not to prove up the validity of any one thing in the long laundry list of rules/laws. The point at this stage is not to establish whether any one point of conduct is or is not moral or sin or civil infraction or practical advice. As David has already simply explained there are a whole bunch of rules in that list of Levitical rules. They are Scripture and therefore to be taken seriously, as I think he is doing. It is clear from numerous comments just here, but more widely among Christians as a whole that absolutely nobody is still following all of them. (For a delightful effort to highlight this fact, see the book "Year of Living Biblically") The simple question is which still do apply to us as moral laws and which do not. There are 3 choices - (1) all are still binding, (2) none are, or, (3) some are and some not. It is abundantly clear that #1 is out. And given the discussion here many think at least one is still binding, so #2 is also out. We are left with #3. The dilemma being tested here is how do you decide which are and which are not. If each of us divided the entire list onto two columns, "applies" and "doesn't apply", the serious and important question for each and every distinction is to have a coherent answer to the question "why?" The answer should hopefully give some guidance to helping with deciding on the hard to figure out rules or the disputed rules. Thus far I do not see anyone giving a good answer to that question. Nobody seems to have a logically consistent answer or set of answers. There is a lot of beating around the bush and evasion of the question. One would hope for something helpful that gives some logical guidance to making the hard distinctions.

we have survived the Winter, it was actually very mild. In the last few weeks we have had temperatures in the mid-teens Celsius and trees are starting to bud, which of course is not great as it will likely freeze hard a few more times. Would love to have fruit trees in my backyard...that is likely more of a Heaven reality ?

God never referred to red hair as an abomination or included that or skin color in the list of those that would be excluded from eternal life. Trivialize much?

I can't believe you of all people are trying to compare red hair with homosexuality!!

HEY ALL the temperature for this 1st spring day in middle TENNESSEE --- is high 48---low 31 i think that is spring weather---right? dgrimm60

Is it superficial study to simply decide that verse 22 of one chapter is binding and verse 27 of the next is not (and remember, the chapters are later additions, the books of the bible were originally not divided this way), without giving any reason? I think not. Rather the reverse: careful study is required. Simply not *caring* what it means to 'round the corners of your head means is what seems sloppy to me. The Jewish links are not definitive, but it's their language we're discussing, and those pages go in some detail in considering what "pe'ah", the word translated as 'corners', actually means. I'm being as careful as I can be, not to be vexatious but because I think it is important.

Yes, God created free-will beings made in His image and after His likeness, but He also warned them that "“You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die.” (Gen 2:16,17) So "yes" homosexuals can marry if they so desire, but they too can suffer the consequences of practicing this sin as a legitimate lifestyle. According to Scriptures "Whoever practices sin is of the devil" (see 1 John 3:8). Practicing sin and sinning are not the same. I sin many times during the day because I have nature that enjoys sin. It's not easy to "walk in the Spirit", after all human nature is very deceptive. The question is what do I do when God's Spirit convicts me of my sins - do I repent or do I justify my sins? Do I admit to Christ my sins? If not, then I'm taking the position that I'm not a sinner. If I'm not a sinner then I don't need Christ's righteousness. If I reject Christ then I must stand before God's law in my own righteousness, which is as filthy rags. So again, sure, the Christian who has homosexual tendencies may justify marrying another of his own gender, but in so doing he is following the dictates of his flesh. To live for the flesh as a lifestyle if very dangerous (see Romans 8:5-8). In fact it will eventually lead to apostasy.

So you believe that God created men and women with homosexual tendencies and that it is natural?

Christ's 'church' can stand until the end, He is taking care of it. Flawed humans are going to fix it? If something needs 'fixing', I trust God enough to take care of it.

1869 ~ a Native American overlooks the newly completed transcontinental railroad

the person holds a position... If Pope John Paul hadn't been the Pope, he wouldn't have been addressed as such. SDA pastors are sometimes called "Elder" out of respect. I think that's weird, too, but who cares, when it's only a title of respect?

The first motorcycle with internal combustion ~ In 1885, the Daimler Reitwagen ("riding wagon") or Einspur ("single track") was a motor vehicle made by Gottlieb Daimler and Wilhelm Maybach, and is widely recognized as the first motorcycle. Daimler is often called "the father of the motorcycle" for this invention. Even when the three steam powered two wheelers that preceded the Reitwagen, the Michaux-Perreaux and Roper of 1867–1869, and the 1884 Copeland, are considered motorcycles, it remains nonetheless the first gasoline internal combustion motorcycle, and the forerunner of all vehicles, land, sea and air, that use its overwhelmingly popular engine type. Drawings from 1884 showed a twist grip belt tensioner, complex steering linkage and used a belt drive. The working model had a simple handlebar and used a pinion gear drive.

Or as they would say in Australia and so many other places in the world, FIRST day of FALL.

Will the homosexual's attraction to his/her own sex be taken to heaven or will it have to be changed at the 2nd coming? If changed, then it's sinful. If not, then it's normal.

I think that David would say: O.K. Establish that.

So happy to welcome Spring ... and so far the promised snow is eluding us. PTL

HEY ALL the 1st day of spring is here---- dgrimm60

David, apparently you glossed over my responses. Sinning isn't the issue. We are all guilty of sin. Its what we do, when convicted of sin, that makes the difference. This is not to say we shouldn't strive to walk by the Spirit and hence not fulfill the lust of the flesh.

I said that homosexuality is a perversion. Cancer and other diseases are a result of the fall.

I think you have some valid points. However, you have not established that "rounding the corners of your head" means cutting hair. Perhaps it refers to practices such as have occurred among certain tribes where the head is shaped in certain ways by a system of molds during growth. To be honest, I didn't read the Jewish links. They have been known to make up their own laws and interpretations on things. They missed understanding a BIG truth, that Jesus was the Messiah, so why should I expect them to get anything else right? Find it in the Bible for me, isn't that fair enough? There is nothing unclear about the wording regarding male-to-male sex in that passage. That's not quite the same, perhaps, as "rounding corners." Nevertheless, if it can be proven that a man should never cut his hair, I think you should start a sect of Nazarites.

I'm not sure why you keep pushing this one so hard. 1) You don't know me, have never met me, and are clueless about what hairstyle I might have. 2) You have not proven the text addresses haircuts. Referencing Jewish interpretations means nothing to me--are they the sole interpreters of scripture? (Sounds almost Catholic.) 3) Would it be a sin to be naturally bald? 4) No one is casting stones. 5) The commandment regarding the casting of stones does not nullify the other commandments of God. 6) If one should not condemn sin, what should one do instead? uphold it? tolerate it? keep silent about it?

I am not certain as to exactly what you mean by endorsing homosexual marriage. But, it is on Biblical grounds that I support laws that make it possible for homosexuals to marry persons of the same gender. How is that position Biblical? It is Biblical in that it is founded in the nature of God. Back in Eden, God gave humanity the right to chose how their life would be lived. I therefore believe that God gave homosexuals the right to chose whom they should marry. I will and I do support that right as a legal right in our society. NOTE: Do not expand my comment well beyond what I have said. 1) Clergy should have and do have the right to chose whom they will provide marriage ceremonies for. 2) I am not advocating a right to rape others--either children or adults. 3) I could name a lot of other things that I am not advocating.

Read More Daily Jesus Scripture: 1 Corinthians 13:8-13 Starting Question: Have you ever been told you are not good enough? How does that feel? Why Sermons on Character Development drive me NUTS For much the same reason that sermons about evolution send me bananas, many sermons about morality drive me nuts. It has been said that anything that can be put in a nutshell, belongs there. I feel this way about a lot of sermons I hear and articles I read about Christian character development. Not because they are bad, just because they come from a different worldview than the Bible. There are lots of books that teach strategies for being a better person. And there are lots of sermons being preached from those books. But, to a large extent, those books are built on a naturalistic worldview rather than the theistic worldview of the Bible. Let me show you what I mean. I recently received a letter from a pastor who stated that good Christian leaders need to have ethos, pathos and logos to earn respect. Because these words are in Greek, we stroke our chins and say, “Ah, yes. Greek! The New Testament is written in Greek. This must be Biblical.” But, it’s not. These three things, which basically mean ethics, emotions and logic are strategies for building persuasion by reason - called “the three artistic proofs” by their creator, Aristotle. They are the foundation for presenting a good version of you in which you compare yourself with other people and your previous self - growing ever more persuasive as you increase in moral virtue. The journey from the mind of Aristotle to the pen of a pastor is one of nearly 2500 years. Aristotle was a student of Plato. Plato was a student of Socrates. All three were the founders of the worldview whose rule we live under today - naturalism. In short, these three philosophers described the foundational rules on which are built mathematics “of two things, each is one and both are two”, science “the matter of knowledge is existence” and philosophy "I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is that I know nothing.” From there, two thousand years later, naturalism and her bedfellow the scientific method evolved. A handful of centuries after these three men started spinning natural answers for supernatural questions, the Christian church began to form, and with it, her first apologist, Paul. The Apostle Paul was a Jewish thinker. He was also Greek thinker. And he knew the teachings of these three men - teachings being developed and taught in The School of Athens for generations. Paul saw how the society around him was being shaped by these ways of thinking. And he said a lot to counter naturalism with supernaturalism. In Greek thought, you are the hero in your own story. In Biblical thought, you are a single player in the storyline of God’s epic narrative in which He is the Hero. Paul worked hard to rescue the Christian worldview from the Greek worldview permeating the world around them. He wrote many letters (and preached many sermons) explaining that God’s people are to build their lives on God’s thoughts, not their own. Christian character development is not about making yourself more persuasive - through developing ethics, emotions or logic - but about showing God and His Truth as more persuasive through faith, hope and love. Faith - looks back. Hope - looks forward. Love - looks everywhere. All are outward focused. None are self-centred. All three are from God, for God and in God. If you spend your days becoming a better version of yourself, your story starts and finishes with you. But if we spend our lives focusing on Jesus, His story, which has neither beginning nor end, will increase and embrace - leading others toward Jesus and into the Kingdom of God. Stop looking at yourself. Look to Jesus. He will shine through you into the world. And He will change you, from (your) glory to (His) glory - to the glory of God the Father. ** Continued in Living Art tomorrow ** Reflection Question: How can you keep your focus on Jesus rather than yourself? Prayer time: Before you pray together, ask: What would you like to say to Jesus today? -x-x-x-x-X-x-x-x-x GET ONE OF DAVE'S BOOKS, FREE! Support this project by clicking here and pledging a small monthly amount. View the full article

Yeah, I had some nectarines last week. Awful! Probably picked too green.

Watched a video (no nudity exposed) of gay and lesbian people touching for the first time some one of the opposite sex. Both the female and male, found it totally disgusting. There is much I fail to grasp, but I do know this, Jesus was the friend of sinners. am ok with.

Lol! He's the goalie

Of course, a person with a strong homosexual orientation (Kinsey 5 or 6) finds the notion of marrying a person of the opposite sex every bit as repulsive... (endorsing what Stan said and making a counter point)

I totally agree. Let's get

I'm very enthusiastic about the miracle which is Sister White. Maybe I don't seem like it given my different (!) approach to her published works, but I am. For me, she is what Adventism is really all about. No more, no less. Even if she didn't think so herself. I'm in a conversation, so far mainly with myself, about her. I'm here to develop this further. Maybe others can share. I don't like being alone. I've never been welcome in any Adventist gathering. I have been called names, terrible things, too many times. Treated violently. Received death threats. Online and offline. This place seems mostly different in that respect. (Maybe I'm just learning to get along better with people.) So, I'm here still. Adventism has a purpose. A now much thwarted purpose in my opinion. It has not succeeded, I think. Perhaps it never will, but I hope for more.

I joined at the invitation of one of the moderators, who read my posts on another forum. I too was about to jump ship because of the hypocrisy I perceived at all levels of the church; and the problems I had with some of the "cultural" interpretations of the 28 Fundies. A very kind and concerned member of this forum took the time to go through each of the Fundies with me as posted on the official church website. I couldn't find any fault in the way they were actually stated, so I postponed leaving. As I started posting more, I found some wonderful, smart, open-minded people here; as well as those who believe differently than I do. The ones that have mastered the art of disagreeing without being disagreeable have inspired me to study more. I still have issues with the way some of the more traditional folks see things; but I'm sure there are those that have issues with my viewpoint. As long as the differences of opinion inspire spirited conversation and deeper study, that's a good thing IMHO. This actually has sorta become my home church. I spend more time with CA than I do my local congregation. I am blessed to be here.

I've been a denizen since fairly early on, and am coming up on 15,000 posts now. I come here to think with friends, and have learned a heap and (I hope) grown over the years. 'Iron sharpens iron', as the Book says, and we learn... perhaps most from those with whom we disagree. There are ways to disagree without being disagreeable, and I always try to and aspire to, but sometimes fall short. I hope I apologise and withdraw the comments when I fail, but even better not to have made it in the first place. Like all of us, I'm still growing up.

I am here because I needed a friend or two in the church. I needed a place where I could speak freely the things that are on my mind--without the fear of judgment. I am here because I have made friends over the years. I am here because I need Jesus.

I originally joined because I was just about ready to dump the church, and return to witchcraft. C/A literally pulled me back.

He will "deceive - if possible - the very elect". That's some deception. Only those indwelt by the spirit of Jesus will "recognize" the final deception. Everyone else - and I mean every person on earth - will "worship" (which means serve) the Beast. Therefore it seems to me, the most important "task" at hand, is to know Jesus - to have a true relationship with Him.

Since I have never seen your biblical backup for this (or if I have seen it, it didn't make enough sense to gel in my mind), I have no basis but your word on which to accept this premise. I think that most of us are "awake" enough to discern the signs of the times, if we keep our minds open to the possibilities. Your analogy about waiting until it's too late to check out the facts doesn't happen until the church is taken into the sky and the 3 "Woes" and/or the 7 bowls start to fall. As far as "checking out the facts" goes, believe me, I have done MUCH fact checking. I have just reached different conclusions than you by looking at those facts. None of us knows the details about the future. We form our constructs based on our own logic and experience. Prophecy will unfold the way it unfolds; and all of us will likely be surprised by how it does happen. Jesus was the only one in His day that knew how the prophecies of His First Coming would unfold; it caught everyone else by surprise. Who actually believed that a body that battered and injured could come back from the dead? Certainly none of His disciples believed until they saw the empty tomb. By the grace of God, we should know who is the beast, antichrist, harlot, etc. WAY before the seven bowl fall - if we keep our eyes open. I don't totally dismiss your scenario; I just hold the one Thomas and I currently profess as more feasible and realistic, given what we see in the world today. Future events could alter my opinion. Blessings to you; over and out.

Here is the choice change your name to your real name or leave cowards bully under fake names.

That's not a pejorative, it's a description of a behaviour. If you read carefully, you would see that my comment about the title you chose for another thread was not that it wasn't 'nice' but that it was biased, and as such made it difficult for a discussion to be fruitful. I'm not that concerned about 'nice'. I'm trying to follow Jesus, and he called people 'a generation of vipers' and 'whited sepulchres'. What you'll notice, though, was that he comforted the afflicted and afflicted the comfortable. Those words were directed to the powerful and corrupt. With the woman at the well, the lepers, the woman caught in adultery, everyone vulnerable, he was gentle. You're just piling on to the most vulnerable people, and as such I have no hesitation in describing that behaviour as bullying.

Good advice for hch; and good advice for all Christians looking forward to the end of this age and the coming Kingdom. Don't leave your denominational blinders in place and miss the current "Signs of the Times"!

In Rev 17:10, 5 "heads"/kings/mountains had fallen when John received the vision. One "was". That would make pagan Rome the 6th head. The "other" who was "yet to come" would "continue a SHORT TIME". Islam has existed since 660 AD. Not exactly a "short time". And the Papacy also lasted longer than several of the others. Not a "short time". Hitler lasted only a short time - compared with the other heads/kings. That is the biggest reason that I see the 8th head as being LIKE Hitler. Now the 8th head - THAT I could definitely see lasting only a "short time".